I'm not talking about the typical user. I'm talking about the numerous 6x7 studio photogs who might still be shooting film or at least have a stock of lenses. I've spoken with a number of PAs over the years who told me that a lot of NY fashion photograpers shot Pentax 6x7. Some of them wouldn't work in those studios because they were afraid of loading the camera. Of course that's a function of the way they worked: two to three bodies, PAs reload while the photographer shoots. For that type of system, the 645D might be a good replacement for the 6x7. Just a notion, based on past encounters and experience. For my MF use, open ap metering would not be critical. I know how to meter manually, and I try not to shoot without thinking about what I'm doing. Paul On Feb 27, 2007, at 11:10 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
> I wouldn't be too sure about that. The 645 was much more of a field > camera, (in fact the 67 was more of a field camera), and the digital > version, will be one as well. Studio cameras tended to have removable > backs, and digital studio cameras tend to be tethered. I think many > users will be looking to use this camera for high quality nature > photography. > > Paul Stenquist wrote: >> Doesn't much matter. Anyone who uses 67 lenses with a 645D will >> probably be using it in the studio or on sticks for a location shoot. >> Paul >> On Feb 27, 2007, at 8:01 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: >> >> >>> I do, as Pentax uses as many systems across camera lines as possible >>> to >>> keep costs down. The metering and auto focus electronics in the 645n >>> were probably, (I only say probably since I've never taken either >>> camera >>> apart, though if someone would like to send me a 645n to sacrifice >>> I'll >>> be happy to compare it's electronic guts to my not economically >>> feasible >>> to repair MZ-3), the same modules as those in the MZ/ZX-5n. I expect >>> the 645D to share the autofocus electronics and metering with the >>> K10D. >>> If they do that, and I have every confidence Pentax will, full >>> aperture >>> metering with 67 lenses is dead as the dodo. >>> >>> Thibouille wrote: >>> >>>> Ah I didn't know. That said, I don't expect Pentax to drop support >>>> for >>>> this in their Pro line. >>>> >>>> 2007/2/27, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>> >>>> >>>>> All 645 lenses are A lenses and are electronically identical to to >>>>> the >>>>> Pentax Ka lens mount. There is no 645 equivalent to a K lens but I >>>>> would expect that the 67 lenses would fill that niche. Remember Ka >>>>> lenses are supported by all Pentax K DSLRs but using the aperture >>>>> ring >>>>> for full aperture metering isn't. >>>>> >>>>> Thibouille wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> If the adapter provides the linkage then 645D should meter >>>>>> normally >>>>>> IMO. >>>>>> Pentax stated that 645D is compatible with all 645 lenses and the >>>>>> DFA55 is announced as being compatible with previous 645 bodies >>>>>> (and >>>>>> it has an aperture ring). >>>>>> >>>>>> So it should (hopefully) be OK. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2007/2/27, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> P. J. Alling wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark Roberts wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 27, 2007, at 3:58 AM, Thibouille wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mmm BTW do 67 lenses provide mecanical coupling when >>>>>>>>>>> used on 645 with adaptor or one you them like M42 on K body ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When used on the current 645, using a 67 lens would be akin to >>>>>>>>>> using an M42 lens on the Pentax digitals. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A little better than that: The 67-645 adapter does provide >>>>>>>>> automatic diaphragm actuation and open aperture metering. At >>>>>>>>> least according to the Pentax literature. I'd love to buy one >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> things if I could ever find one. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But will it offer open aperture metering on the 645D? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Impossible to say without having a 645D to play with, don't you >>>>>>> think? >>>>>>> But I'd be surprised if it didn't. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend >>>>> lw >>>>> uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw >>> uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > -- > Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw > uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
